SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

Keywords:

  • cancer;
  • patients' experience;
  • postoperative care;
  • qualitative study

Abstract

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. Introduction
  4. Background
  5. Methods
  6. Results
  7. Discussion
  8. Conclusion
  9. Acknowledgements
  10. Contributions
  11. Conflict of interest
  12. References

Aims and objectives

To study patients' descriptions of their health after cytoreductive surgery (CRS) before discharge.

Background

Cytoreductive surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) affects the patient's recovery. The hospital stay is long, and it is important to study how patients experience their health postoperatively.

Design

Qualitative descriptive design.

Methods

Between January–May 2012, individual interviews were conducted with 20 patients in a university hospital in central Sweden using a semi-structured interview guide. Data were analysed using qualitative content analysis.

Results

Three themes (a process, body and mind, and support) and nine categories emerged. The surgery was described as a turning point, followed by a period of hope and thankfulness. Nevertheless, patients had difficulty taking in their positive feelings because they were overwhelmed by their bodily ailments. Despite the patients' descriptions of being on an emotional roller coaster, thinking about death and an uncertain future, or being in a state somewhere between sleep and wakefulness, they described themselves as being in good mental health. Continuous individualised information and support from the surgeon and staff members were described as being important for the recovery process, and none of the patients asked for counselling before discharge.

Conclusion

Surgery was described as a turning point followed by an uncertain future. Despite the overwhelming nature of their bodily ailments and being on an emotional roller coaster postoperatively, patients described themselves as being in good psychological health and not needing any professional counselling. Continuous individualised information from the surgeon and staff members played an important role in the recovery process.

Relevance to clinical practice

Both staff and future patients may benefit from the patients' experiences after CRS and HIPEC described in this study. The knowledge gained from this study could be used in designing a care plan for future patients undergoing CRS and HIPEC.


Introduction

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. Introduction
  4. Background
  5. Methods
  6. Results
  7. Discussion
  8. Conclusion
  9. Acknowledgements
  10. Contributions
  11. Conflict of interest
  12. References

Postoperative recovery has been defined as a process where the patients return to their preoperative level of physical and psychological well-being and to their everyday life as it was before the surgery. Postoperative recovery is also described as a process during which patients struggle to return to a feeling of being whole and independent of healthcare professionals (Allvin et al. 2007, Allvin 2009).

According to Allvin et al. (2007), postoperative recovery can be divided into four dimensions: physical, psychological, social and habitual. The main goals are to regain control over bodily functions, to return to mental well-being, to move away from being sick and to feel healthy (Allvin et al. 2007). Allvin (2009) and Wolfer (1973) both describe how important it is for healthcare professionals to be aware of their role in the patient's postoperative recovery. Individualised information and support are key elements in each patient's recovery process (Wolfer 1973, Allvin 2009).

Background

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. Introduction
  4. Background
  5. Methods
  6. Results
  7. Discussion
  8. Conclusion
  9. Acknowledgements
  10. Contributions
  11. Conflict of interest
  12. References

Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) as a treatment for peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC) is an aggressive form of treatment that affects patients' physical and mental health, and their ability to recover after the surgery (Cioppa et al. 2008, Sugarbaker 2008, Macrí et al. 2010).

Peritoneal carcinomatosis is a form of metastasis of tumour cells to the peritoneum (Houghton Mifflin Company 2004, Standrin 2008, National Cancer Institute at the National Institute of Health 2012). It may originate from primary peritoneal malignancies (Glockzin et al. 2009), but the majority stem from a spread of tumour cells, progression of illness or recurrence of tumours of gastrointestinal or gynaecological origin (Tristan et al. 2007, Glockzin et al. 2009). Between 5–50% of all cases of primary gastrointestinal or gynaecological cancers with metastasis can result in PC (Chu et al. 1989, Jayne et al. 2002, Ozols 2004), and PC occurs in patients of all ages (mean age: 50 years) (Hansson 2009).

Peritoneal carcinomatosis is generally associated with a poor prognosis for survival and recovery (Glockzin et al. 2009, Kusamura et al. 2010, Spiliotis et al. 2011). Treatment with CRS and HIPEC has increased the chances not only for survival but also for full recovery with improved quality of life (Mahteme et al. 2004, Sugarbaker 2008, Glockzin et al. 2009, Kusamura et al. 2010, Macrí et al. 2010).

Apart from the surgery, which is described as major and aggressive and not suitable for all patients, the postoperative recovery process is long and challenging both physically and mentally (Cioppa et al. 2008, Sugarbaker 2008, Macrí et al. 2010, Arakelian 2011). Studies have illustrated that patients who undergo treatment with CRS and HIPEC describe an impact on their mental health immediately after the surgery (McQuellon et al. 2001, Schmidt et al. 2005, Arakelian 2011, Arakelian et al. 2011). During the first three weeks, symptoms of disturbed sleep (67% of patients), anxiety, depression, nervousness, feelings of abandonment and/or hallucinations (64% of patients) were described in patients' medical records (Arakelian 2011).

The studies by Schmidt et al. (2005) and McQuellon et al. (2007) also show the same tendencies. The experience of these psychological symptoms is strongest during the first initial weeks after the surgery. During the follow-ups at three, six and 12 months after surgery, patients describe an improvement in their mental health (McQuellon et al. 2001, 2007, Hill et al. 2011).

Health professionals have an important supportive role to play in patient recovery. It is therefore important to gain a better understanding of how health professionals can support patients after CRS and HIPEC. The aim of this study was to study patients' own descriptions of their health after CRS and HIPEC and before discharge from the hospital.

Methods

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. Introduction
  4. Background
  5. Methods
  6. Results
  7. Discussion
  8. Conclusion
  9. Acknowledgements
  10. Contributions
  11. Conflict of interest
  12. References

Design

This study has a qualitative descriptive design where one-on-one interviews were carried out with patients. Qualitative interviews can be used when the aim of the study is to find similarities and differences between the participants' stories (Burnard 1996).

Participants

This study included 20 patients (11 women and nine men) with a mean age of 56 years (42–69 years) undergoing primary CRS and HIPEC between January–May 2012 in a university hospital in central Sweden. Patient selection was intended to include patients of different age groups and genders to get a broad description of their state of health after CRS and HIPEC and before discharge from the hospital. Inclusion criteria were: Swedish-speaking patients over 18 years of age undergoing primary CRS and HIPEC. Exclusion criteria were: patients who did not receive CRS and HIPEC treatment (in other words were ‘opened and closed’), nonSwedish-speaking patients and patients <18 years of age. Patients were asked to participate after admission to the surgical ward in the hospital. They were given time to reflect and the option of declining participation. None of the participants declined participation, and informed consent was collected.

A total of 33 patients underwent surgery during the study period, 13 of whom were excluded from this study: three because they were not Swedish-speaking, nine others because they did not receive the HIPEC and one patient due to the recommendation of the surgeon because of poor mental health prior to surgery. There were no differences with regard to age and gender (p = 0·8 and p = 0·9) between this excluded group and the study participants.

Preoperative preparations and postoperative care

The waiting time for surgery was between four and six months, and during this time, no visits were scheduled at the hospital where the surgery was going to be conducted. Patients could contact the surgeon or the surgical ward in their current hospital if they wished.

Upon admission before surgery, the patients were prepared by means of basic information given by the surgeon, a nurse specialist, a stoma therapist and a physical therapist about the surgical process and postoperative care and recovery. In the hospital where the surgery was going to take place, there were hospital priests and social workers to whom patients could turn if necessary, and help from a psychologist could be offered for counselling.

Postoperatively, patients stayed in the intensive care unit (ICU) for 24 hours where they had the endotracheal tube removed from the trachea and mobilisation started. Patients were then moved to a postoperative care ward for an additional day or two and thereafter transferred to the surgical ward they had initially come from. Patients stayed in single rooms in the surgical ward due to sensitivity to infections after the chemotherapy that was received during surgery, and postoperative recovery was performed according to a schema (Arakelian 2011). Total hospital stay for the patients in this study was 15 days (11–24 days). None of the patients had counselling postoperatively during the hospital stay. Two patients had had such help preoperatively, and one was diagnosed with exhaustion and symptoms of depression (‘burnout’).

Data collection

A total of 20 semi-structured interviews (lasting 20–60 minutes) were carried out approximately 11 days postoperatively (range: 6–17, median: 12 days) by one of the authors (EA). Interviews were held before discharge in the patients' rooms or in a private room in the surgical ward. One interview was conducted at home due to early discharge.

An interview guide (Table 1) with open-ended questions was used to ensure that the interviews covered the aims of the study and that every participant was asked the same questions (Kvale 1997, Graneheim & Lundman 2004). The interview guide consisted of three key questions and eight follow-up questions regarding patients' experiences of physical and mental health and sleeping patterns after the surgery and the kind of support they were offered after the surgery. The follow-up questions were about nausea, eating and drinking, pain, weakness and activity, for example sitting down on a chair, walking and managing to get out of bed. The interview questions were tested in an interview. As no changes were needed to the interview guide, this interview was included in the study. The interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim.

Table 1. The interview guide
Key questionsFollow-up questions
1. Please describe how your health was after surgery.1. What is the first thing that you remember when you woke up? Where were you? How did you feel?
2. How did you feel physically after surgery (about nausea, eating and drinking, pain, weakness, activity e.g. sitting down on a chair, walking, managing to get out of bed, visits from family and friends)?
3. How did you sleep after surgery? How different are your sleeping patterns now compared to prior to surgery?
2. How would you describe your mental health after surgery?4. What do you mean? Please tell me more.
5. How are you feeling today? How would you describe your health today?
3. Where you offered any kind of support after surgery? What kind?6. Did anyone ask you if you needed to see a hospital priest, a social worker or a psychologist? Did you need any support of that kind?
7. Did you miss any kind of support?
8. Now that you have been through the surgery, what form/kind of support would you say that future patients may need?

Data analysis

Data were analysed using qualitative content analysis (Graneheim & Lundman 2004, Krippendorff 2004).

The interviews were initially transcribed and coded (from interview 1–20) by the first (HE), second (KH) and fourth (EA) authors. The interviews were read and re-read, and meaning units, that is, information relevant to the interview questions, were identified. In the next step, the meaning units were condensed and coded, the latter with one or two words, which comprised the core of the meaning unit. Third, categories were created by placing the similar meaning units and thus codes together (Table 2). Finally, themes emerged through discussion amongst the three authors (HE, KH and AE). Ten consecutive interviews were analysed, followed by a further four interviews at which point saturation was reached. Despite the continuous analysis of all the interviews, no more categories emerged. The third author (CLS) analysed 25% of randomly chosen interviews, matching meaning units and codes with the categories created by the three authors (HE, KH and EA). All four authors then discussed the accuracy of categories and themes, and changes were made accordingly.

Table 2. Analysis procedure: how categories were created
Meaning unit (MU)Condensed MUCodeCategory
Death. Not to wake up, family and house and stuff. It is the worst… Life goes on… it doesn't stop just because I'm dying…Death … Not to wake up (after surgery), family and house… life goes on … it doesn't stop just because I'm dying…Death and lifeUncertain future and death

Ethical considerations

The study was performed in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki (World Medical Association 2011) and was approved by the regional ethics committee (Dnr 2008/197). Before participation, each participant was given information about the study and was asked to sign a consent form. Participation was voluntary, and confidentiality was guaranteed by coding the interviews and giving them a number from 1–20.

Results

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. Introduction
  4. Background
  5. Methods
  6. Results
  7. Discussion
  8. Conclusion
  9. Acknowledgements
  10. Contributions
  11. Conflict of interest
  12. References

Three themes and nine categories emerged. The themes were: a process, body and mind, and support. The surgery was described as a turning point, followed by a period of hope and thankfulness. Nevertheless, the patients had difficulty taking in their positive feelings because they were overwhelmed by their bodily ailments. Despite the patients' descriptions of being on an emotional roller coaster, having thoughts about death and an uncertain future, or being in a state somewhere between sleep and wakefulness, they described themselves as being in good psychological health. Continuous individualised information, plus support from the surgeon and staff members, was described as being important for the recovery process, and none of the patients asked for counselling before discharge.

The findings are presented in themes and categories in Table 3.

Table 3. Overview of themes and categories of patients' experiences of postoperative health
ThemeCategory
A processTo start from the beginning
A sense of hope
Uncertain future and death
Body and mindTo keep up with one's own body
Emotional roller coaster
A state of somewhere between sleep and wakefulness
SupportSupport from the surgeon and staff members
Continuous individualised information
Counselling or chat

Theme: a process

Recovering from the severe surgical procedure was described as a process of starting over from the beginning, sometimes with ups and downs, of feeling a sense of hope, and reflections about future and death. The process was discussed as being energy-demanding. Three categories emerged: to start from the beginning, a sense of hope and uncertain future and death.

To start from the beginning

After surgery, which was described as a breakpoint, patients started from the beginning to regain control and acceptance of changes in their body's functions. This period was characterised by becoming used to the situation, being able to take care of oneself and becoming independent. At the time of discharge, a few patients talked about their longing to leave the hospital yet not feeling physically or mentally prepared:

When I woke up this morning I felt like life began anew again… now I feel good… It's all about… you can walk, move… (Interview 10)

It's as the surgeon says… He said two to three months before I get back to myself. And I think, I may have to start from scratch with everything. (Interview 5)

A sense of hope

Even though the recovery process was tough and rough, the patients could feel a sense of hope and thankfulness, a sense that they were in good health. The surgery was over and the process towards regaining their health could finally begin. It was difficult to get past the challenges of the first postoperative days, but they were determined to gradually get better and better. Many patients were surprised that they felt better than they expected to feel and looked forward to going home:

I was so ill, but then it has indeed gotten better and better and I also feel some kind of hope that it will be fine, because I feel that my stomach works better and better actually…and they [the staff members] did tell me that it will work normally again. (Interview 4)

Everything is improving all the time. It happens slowly… You don't think you can get up. One day you can't get up, but the next day you get up and on the third day you can walk…. (Interview 2)

Uncertain future and death

Several patients expressed concerns about an uncertain future. The surgical procedure and the disease itself had brought the patients close to death, and some realised that life is finite and that no one is immortal. Questions arose about the future, the financial situation, the ability to have children and not wanting to die:

Death… Not to wake up [after surgery], family and house and things. It's the worst…life goes on…it doesn't stop just because I die… (Interview 1)

Suddenly I realize that life is finite and that I'm going to die… and maybe pretty soon…Then everything [in one's life] gets very different… (Interview 15)

Theme: body and mind

During the early recovery phase, the patients were busy keeping up with their body's reactions, trying to handle the emotions that arose after surgery or being in between two worlds. Three categories emerged: to keep up with one's own body, emotional roller coaster and state of somewhere between sleep and wakefulness.

To keep up with one's own body

During the first days after surgery, the patients experienced poor memory and poor general health. The surgical procedure was described as extensive and tough, and as a result, there followed physical and psychological fatigue and weakness beyond the ordinary.

In the early recovery phase, the patients were busy with the physical functions of their bodies and recovering from the surgery rather than with their mental health. Common problems were pain and the resulting difficulty in regaining mobility, postoperative pain management, nausea and loss of appetite. Patients described every step back, such as having infections or fever, as significant:

…I mean you are busy with drinking liquid and eating food, and you don't know what happened really. You don't take it in, you should be happy… (Interview 15)

…after surgery you suffer the consequences, feeling very tired, weak and you can't be bothered so much. It's hard to find energy to stand up and such things. It's not really tough, but it is an effort even to go down to the dayroom for example… (Interview 11)

Emotional roller coaster

The patients described having difficulties handling the emotions that they felt after surgery. Some patients experienced it as an emotional short circuit such as panic, which in one case was caused by opiates. Others described it as being on an emotional roller coaster. Although many were grateful for having had a successful surgery, they were overwhelmed, bursting into tears one minute and laughing the next:

I think your whole head is awash with so many questions and thoughts and impressions and expressions, so you can't sort them out. That's why you have panic attacks. Because you don't know what to think about, you can't focus [your thoughts]… (Interview 2)

It is more like mood swings. Crying one minute, laughing the next, sleeping the next… that's what it's like and that's what has been tough: why do I cry so much? I have nothing to cry about really. Everything has gone well and the staff around here is so amazingly nice but for now, these crying attacks keep coming back… (Interview 14)

State of somewhere between sleep and wakefulness

Sleeping in intervals was commonly described, and some of these disturbances were caused by the ward environment. Most patients commented on the environment of the postoperative care ward in the early postoperative phase, which was described as noisy with no privacy for the patients and feeling like a storage room for patients. Positioning in the bed, chills, worry and having many or strange dreams were other reasons for sleep disturbances. However, while several patients talked about having unchanged sleeping patterns postoperatively, some talked about hallucinations or being in a state somewhere between sleep and wakefulness:

…This painting, for example, I could turn into all sorts of shapes and even though you can't think of anything, yet you think of a lot. And you don't really know you're in kind of an intermediate world, hallucinating or something like that. Very tough mentally… (Interview 2)

and then I got to another place… the postoperative care ward or something. It was a terrible place to be in. Far too many patients and not enough staff. It was almost as if you could feel an atmosphere of “Don't come here and disturb us. You're in the way”… and that didn't feel good… (Interview 14)

Theme: support

Many factors were mentioned as having an impact on the recovery process, such as continuous individualised information, support from the staff members, especially the surgeon, and talking to someone in the form of counselling or small talk. Three categories emerged: support from the surgeon and staff members, continuous individualised information and counselling or small talk.

Support from the surgeon and staff members

Almost all the patients felt that the surgeon had an important role in their recovery process. The patients were amazed by the personal engagement, positive energy and motivational talks by the surgeon who visited the patients many times during the day and always had time for conversation. Patients felt that they were a part of their own care and that they were acknowledged and well treated by the staff members who were described as supportive, encouraging, competent, present and listening, all of which resulted in gaining the patients' trust:

…he [the surgeon] visited me twice a day….he is phenomenal, he has helped me… he is enormously positive….he has supported me a lot… (Interview 11)

… The nurses and the assistant nurses are more involved in this [group of patients]. They come into your room and ask (how you are), although they may not even be working that particular shift… they might ask when they walk past in the corridor as well. It feels really nice that there is someone who cares beyond what they need to; they take it one step further. It feels incredibly rewarding, you feel noticed and I'm very grateful for that. (Interview 16)

Continuous individualised information

Straightforward and honest information that was adapted to the patient's individual needs was important for the recovery process. The information provided before surgery prepared the patients not to be surprised by the events that occurred postoperatively. The amount of information should vary depending on the patient: some want to know more and others less, for example, about the surgical procedure. However, many patients agreed that continuous information was important on a daily basis. They wanted to know that they were not the only one who had certain symptoms but that the staff had seen those symptoms before:

…thorough information…. direct and to the point, not just half-truths and confusing answers but it was honest and sincere… (Interview 12)

…Some patients don't want to know if the surgery might be very hard, so sometimes it's better not to know… (Interview 16)

Counselling or small talk

Several patients believed that having a conversation with someone was a form of support. Some patients preferred a small talk with staff members, the surgeon or their family members. For these patients, it was important to have a social context. Others talked about more professional help in the form of counselling or a patient association or talking to someone who has actually gone through the same surgical procedure. However, counselling was perceived as important by many even though they also stated that they were occupied by their physical symptoms and were not reflecting on their mental health for the time being.

One patient expressed the latter as:

…but I didn't get the opportunity [counselling], but even if I had had it, I wouldn't have taken it. …Patients should be given the opportunity to have counselling. They [the staff members] should ask the question and the choice should be completely voluntary for the patient… (Interview 16)

…that someone had the time to sit and talk…the hours can be long, especially on those days you don't have visitors. Could be fun with someone who had time to talk. There is time and opportunity if you need to talk and asked the staff… (Interview 12)

Discussion

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. Introduction
  4. Background
  5. Methods
  6. Results
  7. Discussion
  8. Conclusion
  9. Acknowledgements
  10. Contributions
  11. Conflict of interest
  12. References

According to studies by Cioppa et al. (2008), Macrí et al. (2010) and Sugarbaker (2008), CRS and HIPEC is an aggressive form of treatment that affects the whole patient physically and mentally and thus affects the ability to recover after the surgery. The surgical procedure is considered arduous, and the waiting time before having the surgery is between four–six months.

However, in this study and during this early phase of recovery (before discharge from hospital), many patients described being in good mental health or feeling better than expected. The first theme of this study mostly describes the feelings and thoughts that arise after surgery. Patients in this study expressed a feeling of hope and thankfulness that the surgery, which was described as a turning point, was done. It may be speculated that before surgery and during the waiting time for surgical procedures, patients built up some level of anxiety (Sukegawa et al. 2008), not knowing how far the cancer had spread or how long they would have to wait for surgery (Perks et al. 2009). This, in its turn, may explain why surgery is called a turning point, something that the patients have been waiting or longing for. After surgery, a positive feeling of hope and a new beginning arises, and this is followed by thoughts of uncertainty about their future and death. The patients' experiences during the period from receiving the diagnosis up until surgery were not studied. However, these might well have an effect on patients' mental health and the emotions that arise after surgery.

During the early postoperative period, many patients focused on the reaction of their bodily functions to surgery. The main problems during this period were pain, nausea and loss of appetite and fatigue. Allvin et al. (2007) and Allvin (2009) described postoperative recovery as a process that focuses on returning to a feeling of being whole (Allvin et al. 2007, Allvin 2009). This was described in the second theme and underlying categories that emerged in this study, which highlighted the importance of gaining control over bodily functions and trying to deal with the emotions that came up after surgery. Arakelian (2011), Arakelian et al. (2011), McQuellon et al. (2001) and Schmidt et al. (2005) reported symptoms of disturbed sleep (67% of patients), anxiety, depression, nervousness, a feeling of abandonment and/or having hallucinations (64% of patients) during the first three postoperative weeks.

Having experiences like hallucinations and being in a state somewhere between sleep and wakefulness was one of the categories found in this study. Patients also described having emotional ups and downs and having crying attacks, which they could not explain even though the surgery had been successful and pain and other physical symptoms were milder and fewer than expected. Studies by Hill et al. (2011), McQuellon et al. (2001, 2007) indicate that these reactions are strongest during the first few weeks after the surgery and that within the follow-ups three, six and 12 months after surgery, patients describe an improvement in their mental health.

It may be argued that sleeping disturbances or hallucinations may be caused by medications or the anaesthetic agents received during surgery. However, this issue was not addressed in this study. Patients mentioned sleeping in intervals especially during the first few nights after surgery. Some of the explanations for this were the nightly postoperative controls of blood pressure and so on performed by the nurses. Another issue was the impact of the environment, especially in the postoperative care ward, which was mentioned by many. Noise, light and feelings of stress were described as being the reasons for not sleeping well. The impact of sound in the environment on patients' heart rate and blood pressure has been highlighted in a study by Hsu et al. (2010) as causing annoyance and insomnia. However, in this study, sleeping patterns were normalised for many patients in the surgical ward.

The third theme in this study concerned support. Interestingly, in the current study, none of the patients had asked for counselling postoperatively during their hospital stay. Two patients had had such help preoperatively, and one was diagnosed with burnout. However, counselling was perceived as important by many, even though they also stated that they were occupied by their physical symptoms and were not reflecting on their mental health for the time being. Many preferred small talk in the form of everyday talk (Swenne et al. 2007) or someone to talk to whenever their questions arose, which could be at night or after visiting hours. Patients mentioned the surgeon, his frequent visits, enthusiasm and positive energy and being involved in their own care as important for their recovery process. The role of healthcare professionals in the patient's postoperative recovery was mentioned by Allvin (2009) and Wolfer (1973), who found that individualised information and support are key elements in a patient's recovery process.

Methodological consideration

To increase the study's credibility (internal validity), the fourth author (CLS) analysed the interviews independently, testing the accuracy of meaning units and categories. As another step, quotations from the interviews were included to strengthen the creation of the categories. One of the authors (EA) conducted all interviews using the same semi-structured interview guide for all study participants. However, transcriptions were made by all three authors who performed data analysis. The interview questions were tested in one interview, and as no changes were needed to the interview guide, this interview was included in the study.

Dependability (reliability) was demonstrated by describing every step of the data analysis as clearly as possible, to let the readers follow the creation of meaning units, categories and finally the themes.

Transferability (external validity) was ensured by describing the study context and participants as well as the inclusion and exclusion criteria.

To increase conformability (objectivity), the writers worked closely with the interview text, giving quotations from different interviews. This was to minimise the influence of the authors' preunderstanding of the subject under analysis, namely health. Three of the authors (EA, HE and CLS) worked in different surgical departments, and only one of the authors (EA), who also conducted the interviews, had previously worked with patients with PC. Thus, three of the authors (HE, KH and CLS) were unfamiliar with the specific clinical course or postoperative recovery after CRS and HIPEC, but they were familiar with the concept of surgery, which increased the conformability of the findings.

One limitation of this study concerns the patients who were excluded due to language difficulties or because they did not have the CRS and HIPEC treatment. Two of the latter had no disease and thus left the hospital early after surgery where the abdomen was ‘opened, inspected and closed’. Five other patients underwent this same procedure, but nothing could be done for these patients due to the extensive spread of disease. One can speculate that in this group, palliative care would be the choice of treatment, and thus, more reactions or emotions in terms of anxiety or depression might be expected. Additionally, two patients were excluded, one because of poor mental health prior to surgery. This patient and other similar patients are important to follow up and study with a focus on their mental health because they possibly have other support needs.

However, the course of care for patients not receiving CRS and HIPEC may be different, and thus, this group was excluded. There were no differences between the excluded group and the study participants with regard to age and gender.

Another possible limitation of the study is the number of interviews. However, the 20 interviews were rich, and saturation was reached after 14 interviews.

Conclusion

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. Introduction
  4. Background
  5. Methods
  6. Results
  7. Discussion
  8. Conclusion
  9. Acknowledgements
  10. Contributions
  11. Conflict of interest
  12. References

Surgery was described as a turning point followed by an uncertain future. Despite the overwhelming nature of their bodily ailments and being on an emotional roller coaster postoperatively, patients described themselves as being in good psychological health and not needing any professional counselling. Continuous individualised information from the surgeon and staff members played an important role in the recovery process.

Relevance to clinical practice

Both staff and future patients may benefit from this research, which provides a picture of some patients' experiences of cytoreductive surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy.

The knowledge gained from this study could be used in designing a care plan for future patients undergoing cytoreductive surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy.

Acknowledgements

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. Introduction
  4. Background
  5. Methods
  6. Results
  7. Discussion
  8. Conclusion
  9. Acknowledgements
  10. Contributions
  11. Conflict of interest
  12. References

The authors of this manuscript would like to thank all the patients for participating in the study and sharing their experiences with us.

Contributions

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. Introduction
  4. Background
  5. Methods
  6. Results
  7. Discussion
  8. Conclusion
  9. Acknowledgements
  10. Contributions
  11. Conflict of interest
  12. References

Study design: EA; data collection and analysis: EA, HE, KH and manuscript preparation: HE, KH, CLS, EA.

References

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. Introduction
  4. Background
  5. Methods
  6. Results
  7. Discussion
  8. Conclusion
  9. Acknowledgements
  10. Contributions
  11. Conflict of interest
  12. References
  • Allvin R (2009) Postoperative Recovery. Doctoral Thesis, Örebro University, Örebro.
  • Allvin R, Berg K, Idvall E & Nilsson U (2007) Postoperative recovery: a concept analysis. Journal of Advanced Nursing 57, 552558.
  • Arakelian E (2011) Operating Room Efficiency and Postoperative Recovery After Major Abdominal Surgery. Doctoral Thesis, Uppsala University, Uppsala.
  • Arakelian E, Gunningberg L, Larsson J, Norlén K & Mahteme H (2011) Factors influencing early postoperative recovery after cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy. Journal of Cancer Surgery 37, 897903.
  • Burnard P (1996) Teaching the analysis of textual data: an experimental approach. Nurse Education Today 16, 278281.
  • Chu DZ, Lang NP, Thompson C, Osteen PK & Westbrook KC (1989) Peritoneal carcinomatosis in non-gynecologic malignancy. A study of prognostic factors. Cancer 63, 356357.
  • Cioppa T, Vaira M, Bing C, D'Amico S, Bruscino A & De Simone M (2008) Cytoreduction and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy in the treatment of Peritoneal carcinomatosis from pseudomyxoma peritonei. World Journal of Gastroenterology 14, 68176823.
  • Glockzin G, Schlitt HJ & Piso P (2009) Peritoneal carcinomatosis: patients selection, perioperative complications and quality of life related to cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy. World Journal of Surgical Oncology 7, 18.
  • Graneheim UH & Lundman B (2004) Qualitative content analysis in nursing research: concepts, procedures and measures to achieve trustworthiness. Nurse Education Today 24, 105112.
  • Hansson J (2009) Loco-Regional Treatment of Peritoneal Carcinomatosis Survival, Morbidity and Quality of Life. Doctoral Thesis, Uppsala Universitet, Uppsala.
  • Hill AR, McQuellon RP, Russell GB, Shen P, Stewart JH & Levine A (2011) Survival and quality of life following cytoreductive surgery plus hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy for peri-toneal carcinomatosis of colonic ori-gin. Annals of Surgical Oncology 18, 36733679.
  • Houghton Mifflin Company (2004) Definition of ‘Carcinomatosis’. Available at: http://medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/carcinomatosis (accessed 9 January 2012).
  • Hsu SM, Ko WJ, Liao WC, Huang SJ, Chen RJ, Li CY & Hwang SL (2010) Associations of exposure to noise with physiological and psychological outcomes among post-cardiac surgery patients in ICUs. Clinics 65, 985989.
  • Jayne DG, Fook S, Loi C & Sew-Choen F (2002) Peritoneal carcinomatosis from colorectal cancer. British Journal of Surgery 89, 15451550.
  • Krippendorff K (2004) Content Analysis: An Introduction to its Methodology. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
  • Kusamura S, Baratti D, Zaffaroni N, Villa R, Laterza B, Balestra M & Deraco M (2010) Pathophysiology and biology of peritoneal carcinomatosis. World Journal of Gastrointestinal Oncology 2, 1218.
  • Kvale S (1997) Den Kvalitativa Forskningsintervjun [The Qualitative Research Interview]. Student literature, Lund [in Swedish].
  • Macrí A, Saladino E, Bartolo V, Adamo V, Altavilla G, Mondello E & Famulari C (2010) Peritoneal carcinomatosis of colorectal origin. World Journal of Gastrointestinal Oncology 2, 98101.
  • Mahteme H, Hansson J, Berglund Å, Påhlman L, Glimelius B, Nygren P & Graf W (2004) Improved survival in patients with peritoneal metastases from colorectal cancer: a preliminary study. British Journal of Cancer 90, 403407.
  • McQuellon RP, Loggie BW, Fleming RA, Russel GB, Lehman AB & Rambo TD (2001) Quality of life after intraperitoneal hyperthermic chemotherapy (IPHC) for peritoneal carcinomatosis. European Journal of Surgical Oncology 27, 6573.
  • McQuellon RP, Danhauer SC, Russell GB, Shen P, Fenstermaker J, Stewart JH & Levine EA (2007) Monitoring health outcomes following cytoreductive surgery plus intraperitoneal hyperthermic chemotherapy for peritoneal carcinomatosis. Annals of Surgical Oncology 14, 11051113.
  • National Cancer Institute at the National Institute of Health (2012) NCI Dictionary of Cancer Terms. Definition of ‘Carcinosis’. Available at: http://www.cancer.gov/dictionary?CdrID=285963 (accessed 9 January 2012).
  • Olsson U, Bergbom I & Bosaeus I (2002) Patients' experiences of the recovery period 3 months after gastrointestinal cancer surgery. European Journal of Cancer Care 11, 5160.
  • Ozols RF (2004) Update on Gynecologic Oncology Group (GOC) trials in ovarian cancer. Cancer Investigation 22, 1120.
  • Perks A, Chakravarti S & Manninen P (2009) Preoperative anxiety in neurosurgical patients. Journal of Neurosurgical Anesthesiology 21, 127130.
  • Schmidt U, Dahlke MH, Klempnauer J, Schlitt HJ & Piso P (2005) Perio-perative morbidity and quality of life in long-term survivors following cytoreductive surgery and hyperthe-rmic intraperitoneal chemotherapy. Journal of Cancer Surgery 31, 5358.
  • Spiliotis JD, Halkia EA & Efstathiou E (2011) Peritonealcarcinomatosis 2011; it′s about time for chemosurgery. Journal of Balkan Union of Oncology 16, 400.
  • Standrin S (2008) Gray's Anatomy - The Anatomical Basis of Clinical Practice, 40th edn. Elsevier, Churchill Livingstone.
  • Sugarbaker P (2008) Overview of peritoneal carcinomatosis. Cancerología 3, 119124.
  • Sukegawa A, Miyagi E, Asai-Sato M, Saji H, Sugiura K, Matsumura T, Kamijyo A, Hirayasu Y, Okamoto N & Hirahara F (2008) Anxiety and prevalence of psychiatric disorders among patients awaiting surgery for suspected ovarian cancer. Journal of Obste-trics and Gynaecology Research 34, 543551.
  • Swenne CL, Skytt B, Lindholm C & Carlsson M (2007) Patients' experiences of mediastinitis after coronary artery bypass graft procedure. Scandinavian Cardiovascular Journal 41, 255264.
  • Tristan DY, Zappa L, Edwards G, Alderman R, Marquardt CE & Sugarbaker PH (2007) Perioperative outcomes of cytoreductive surgery and perioperative intraperitoneal chemotherapy for non-appendiceal peritoneal carcinomatosis from a prospective database. Journal of Surgical Oncology 96, 102112.
  • Wolfer JA (1973) Definition and assessment of surgical patients' welfare and recovery. Selected review of the literature. Nursing Research 22, 394.
  • World Medical Association (WMA) (2011) Declaration of Helsinki: 1964. Available at: http://www.wma.net/en/30publications/10policies/b3/index.html (accessed 7 November 2012).

The Journal of Clinical Nursing (JCN) is an international, peer reviewed journal that aims to promote a high standard of clinically related scholarship which supports the practice and discipline of nursing.

For further information and full author guidelines, please visit JCN on the Wiley Online Library website: http://wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/jocn

Reasons to submit your paper to JCN:

High-impact forum: one of the world's most cited nursing journals, with an impact factor of 1·316 – ranked 21/101 (Nursing (Social Science)) and 25/103 Nursing (Science) in the 2012 Journal Citation Reports® (Thomson Reuters, 2012).

One of the most read nursing journals in the world: over 1·9 million full text accesses in 2011 and accessible in over 8000 libraries worldwide (including over 3500 in developing countries with free or low cost access).

Early View: fully citable online publication ahead of inclusion in an issue.

Fast and easy online submission: online submission at http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/jcnur.

Positive publishing experience: rapid double-blind peer review with constructive feedback.

Online Open: the option to make your article freely and openly accessible to non-subscribers upon publication in Wiley Online Library, as well as the option to deposit the article in your preferred archive.